Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

its actually very simple in my very own opinion,

its pretty much the only way to keep pvp competive and "fair" since all is on equal ground (when they have geared up) and your 100 % confidence is just pulled outta your a** since games like CoD and all the different mobas don't offer much reward except the joy of outplaying your opponents

if you wan't to stick to MMO's i guess wow high ranking arenas and GW2 battleground or what its called is still thriving despite people being geared already and just playing to show how skilled they are.

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

It depends on what someone is looking for their competitive gameplay. Why they look for that in MMORPGs, a genre that, by design, goes against everything that is needed for that type of gameplay is the part that I don't get.

"And wikipedia is as accurate as Britannica. Wikipedia is very reliable. You would be hard pressed to find a more reliable source for these kinds of things." -fivoroth

Report this post

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

Some people would, because they find it enjoyable. Different people, different tastes etc. In much the same way a PvP purely game with no rewards for PvP would not get much fan service.

As for your questions...

1) Most people in modern MMOs look the same anyway, most people in older MMOs did too. People will gravitate towards the most beneficial armour, if that wasn't the gear you mentioned it would be something else, this has always happened.

2) As opposed to the same areas for open world PvP over and over?

3) Nothing. Just as there is nothing massively about ganking people who aren't expecting it with a few friends. Almost every successful MMO also grinds to an unplayable mess in large scale fights.

4) Same with any form of PvP. Whilst there are a few people who can shine and adapt whilst thinking outside the box, the vast majority perform the same routine, over and over and over. In many cases the unpredictability of other players is 'did they really just use that there? What a waste!'

5) Avoiding ganking or being ganked again is one of the reasons people enjoy this type of PvP, they are on a relatively even playing field rather than that of prey that cannot fight back, or predator that is seeking aforementioned prey.

6) You say dumbed down for children, others would say entertaining for a brief play session. Opinions.

It is true that Arena style PvP is quite probably easier to develop, and direct, than other forms of PvP but equally given the diversity of players in the genre I can guarantee you won't please everyone and what you would enjoy would no doubt frustrate or annoy someone else, as arenas do for you.

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

Those are all your own personal opinions and I disagree with all of them. I prefer arena, makes me feel like a gladiator or in rocket arena quake. Also fast paced and quicker than chasing someone down all over the world.

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

What is the point of sports in general. Every team member wears the same outfit, it's always played on the same field and there is no element of surprise?

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from PVE questing and dungeons, nobody would play them!

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

This really depends on gear. The few PvP games that aren't gear-grind centric don't really have this problem.

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

Every game has redundant gameplay. It's more a question of 'which' redundant gameplay bothers you, as all games get highly repetative, especially the best ones.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

This kinda misses the point. Arena PvP isn't supposed to be 'Massively Multiplayer' (that's where RvR / siege warfare comes in), it's more about having a PvP system people can enjoy WITHIN the MMO of their choice.

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

This, again, depends on the game, and whether or not there is a healthy meta. If there is, then these strategies change fairly frequently. And what might work one month, might not work at all the next.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

Not necessarily. Stealth mechanics, ambushes, etc. can definitely surprise opponents. This, of course, depends on games having good map design / multiple places for people to hide & flank.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

Immersion is an RP thing. NOT a PvP thing. Most PvPers couldn't give a F*@( about immersion. It's about good gameplay over feeling attached to your elf wearing earrings that magically make him do 10% more damage, or his magical underpants.

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

Lazy design is doing something that doesn't work as well, because it's easier. Not doing something simpler because it works better. Arenas are the later. You might not like them, but they're about as balanced as PvP gets. It's like calling the gladiators 'dumbed down and for children'.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

Comments in quotes... now for the main answer:

You don't understand them, because you are an RPer trying to explain away a PvP system. Simply put the two mindsets operate on entirely different sets of rules. Everything you are bashing Arena PvP for, is what makes games like TF2, Counterstrike, Battlefield, League of Legends, Dota, Call of Duty etc. etc. etc. wildly successful. The rewards are definitely icing, but most of those games are fun without the rewards.

Can you honestly say that most people would play PvE in an MMORPG if there were no rewards? Why the double standard?

- The appeal to arena PvP is that it's structured, and generally balanced (or at least is supposed to be). PvPers like games that challenge their skillset, encorperate strategy, and have the winner being achieved by skill / luck, instead of how much time they spent in dungeon X.

Arenas offer this, without forcing players to play a different game to get such an experience. It's an attempt to keep players in your game, because most gamers have varying tastes and like to do a variety of things. Some games take the PvP more seriously, some the PvE, but most games that focus too heavily on one or the other tend to be fairly niche. It might be more immersive, but that doesn't necessarily make it a better game.

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

I would ask the same thing of fans of DaoC but they actually SAY that they dont like PvP unless a developer creates the situations and the pride for them and in a way that wont confuse them with an enemy that may look like them.

Basically what I am saying is, its not just "arena PvP" its all "carrot on a stick themepark PvP".

If the game doesnt allow PvP anywhere in the world, no I dont mean "FFA" though that is included, just being able to flag and fight anywhere...then its themepark PvP and that is ALWAYS about the shiney, either gear, title, buffs...some kind of reward.

Report this post

Do you also not understand how games like DOTA, DOTA2, LoL, HoN etc are amongst the most played games at the moment? Or first person shooters like CS, COD, BF etc?

Instanced Arena PVP offers the same thing they all offer (essentially) - quick, repeatable, enjoyable player vs player content that is incredibly easy to get in to requiring minimal effort that can be played at any time. If you ask "well then why not just play one of those games", its because people also enjoy the MMO & RPG aspects that those games dont offer.

You personally may find them boring, and to each his own thats just your opinion. Saying that if the rewards were removed people wouldnt play them is pretty much wrong though, as proven by numerous 'arena-PVP' games mentioned above being some of the most successful games of all time.

Just because someone loves MMO's doesnt mean thats all they love. And just because they love MMO's doesnt mean they necessarily love PVP, and even if they did love both it doesnt necessarily mean they love massive PVP.

Massive, large-scale PVP is honestly a game system that appeals to a niche audience for a number of different reasons (as mentioned above). 'Developer laziness' may play a part in it as they will often be hindered by technical limitations of engines and player's machines as graphics continue to increase, but it is also a design choice that appeals to a larger audience than large-scale PVP would, so unless they wanted to nail down a niche audience its the smart thing for devs to do.

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

Can't see what is terrible about this. It doesn't bother me. Are you saying you won't use the best gear available if everyone else are using the same gear?Too mainstream?

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

MMORPGs are filled with redundant gameplay. Not sure why you would think this is somehow related to arena PvP specifically. Besides, I don't like earning PvP gear through PvE - there's just something wrong with that.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

Massive multiplayer means nothing. Very few MMORPGs allow battles of the size anyone would call "massive" anyway. It is completely arbitrary. In any case, more often than not, the developers are not trying to fulfill anyone's definition of an acronym (initialism really); Instead, they're trying to make a fun game.

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

Instance no relation to game depth whatsoever. There are tons of examples if you really want to contest this: League of Legends, Starcraft, Warcraft, Counter Strike, Quake, Super Street Fighter, Guild Wars... All have been played for years. All successful e-sports games with cash tournaments.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

Wrong. If there is no build element, the surprise comes from the combat and tactics. In contrast, in open world PvP, 9/10 times combat is just a formality - there really are no surprises there.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

Dumbed down for children? Well, forgetting that this is an obvious troll bait, can you really support the statement that the top e-sports games are for children and they're easy? -Man, you must be loaded with all that tournament monoey!

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

Instanced PvP is far from developer laziness because making it good is every bit as hard as making any other style of PvP good. Even more so, competitive PvP crowd is much more critical about depth and balance unlike say those who prefer open world PvP.

The core principle is: make it "easy to learn, hard to master", and above all else, make it fun.

In comparison, instanced PvP offers more fun, more frequently and more consistently. Your time is not wasted by arduous side-activities, preparation, searching the enemy or traversing to the site, your contribution is guaranteed to matter, and you are guaranteed to have a good chance to win. May the best player win.

That's the appeal.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky

Report this post

Arena PvP to me is like a Professional boxing match in MSG. 2 sides, evenly matched, very structured where, all things considered the best side/individual should win.

RvR is like your typical war between countries. Usually lots of people vs lots of people with the potential for widely ranging skills and abilities. Sometimes tactics, sometimes numbers sometimes skill wins the day.

OWPvP is like gang warfare or criminal activities. No structure, rarely balanced, the aim is to pick on the weakest opponent for the most gain without real risk.

I guess it depends what type of PvP you want.

I personally prefer structured and balanced because I believe the PvP is more fun and a better test of skill. Random gank squads or high level attacking low level in OWPvP or Zergs and circle keep taking in RvR never really shout out 'skill' or 'fun' as much. Sure you can have fun and be skillful but you can just as easilly have the opposite engagement. But that is just my assessment.

Report this post

Arena PvP to me is like a Professional boxing match in MSG. 2 sides, evenly matched, very structured where, all things considered the best side/individual should win.

RvR is like your typical war between countries. Usually lots of people vs lots of people with the potential for widely ranging skills and abilities. Sometimes tactics, sometimes numbers sometimes skill wins the day.

OWPvP is like gang warfare or criminal activities. No structure, rarely balanced, the aim is to pick on the weakest opponent for the most gain without real risk.

I guess it depends what type of PvP you want.

RvR/Faction warfare couldn't be any further removed from typical war between countries.

OWPVP is like ANY warfare.

"And wikipedia is as accurate as Britannica. Wikipedia is very reliable. You would be hard pressed to find a more reliable source for these kinds of things." -fivoroth

Report this post

Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...

Trust me, you are not the only one. The other 100 posters who started exactly the same thread as you didn't get it either.

#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).

Not necessarily. This doesn't bother me though. I played a druid in WoW and I looked like every single other druid because I was in shapeshift form all the time hehe :D

#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.

So? I play SC2 where there are like 5-10 maps and I have played like 2k matches on them without getting bored. In Dota/LoL they only have ONE map.

#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?

Nothing. But here is where you get it wrong. A lot of people don't want to have massive zerg fests as that doesn't require much skill and it's not considered fair. Then again ganking in the world is not exactly massive too .

#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.

No, no and no! There are always new ways to approach a fight.

#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.

Well, that's makes it fair and competitive.

#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.

I couldn't care less about immersion in PvP to be honest. Although saying that Arena PvP is dumbed down and it's for children is insulting to everyone who enjoys this kind of PvP. What exactly makes your world zerg fest any more mature and complex?

Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.

I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.

Wrong. You seem so convinced that YOUR opinion and preference of playing PvP is the only way to go.You say competitive instanced PvP is super dumbed down. So you enjoy complex PvP? But you can't grasp the "simple" idea that people like different things?

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

I call it cage fighting when 1v1 to 5v5... 10v10 plus is just organized scrims. The theory is you are being matched against opponents that actually care about the outcome, not merely points/gear. But the reality is, it's just another way to grind gear in less time.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Loktofeit

It depends on what someone is looking for their competitive gameplay. Why they look for that in MMORPGs, a genre that, by design, goes against everything that is needed for that type of gameplay is the part that I don't get.

This indeed is the part that i've pondered every now and then.

We've WoW to blame for introducing such a useless feature into the genre, that is definitely more niche than many other features that gets overlooked, but yet arenas appear.

Report this post

Arena PvP to me is like a Professional boxing match in MSG. 2 sides, evenly matched, very structured where, all things considered the best side/individual should win.

RvR is like your typical war between countries. Usually lots of people vs lots of people with the potential for widely ranging skills and abilities. Sometimes tactics, sometimes numbers sometimes skill wins the day.

OWPvP is like gang warfare or criminal activities. No structure, rarely balanced, the aim is to pick on the weakest opponent for the most gain without real risk.

I guess it depends what type of PvP you want.

RvR/Faction warfare couldn't be any further removed from typical war between countries.

OWPVP is like ANY warfare.

I agree. There's no rules (not in total war anyway) and nobody could give a shit if the other guy is fighting with just sticks and rocks. The point of warfare is to win by any means necessary.

RvR and such is way more structured than that.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky